Okay I went to a freind who bought it. On PC. And his PC is not quite gaming PC (some rubbish laptop with GTX 850) so he set everything on low but nVidia Shadowplay says it's running avg 25FPS…
Does graphics (when upped a bit higher so I can see it) choke it? I say no.
Great: faces
Good: hair, houses/cars/trees/boats
horrible and look like playstation 1: clothes, weather effects, sky
Overall impression on visuals - this looks like a game from playstation 3, not from playstation 4
Music is basically radio stations and it's great.
Story what I've seen starts a bit confusing but you get into it fast. Voiceovers feel awsome, especially Cassandra - you'll instantly recognize Erica Tazel, even the face looks like her a bit.
Driving is horrible and you waste too much time in a car. Why someone believes Need for Speed needs a story? Or why someone believes a story needs Need for Speed?
Stealth is okay but worse than classic stealth games. Melee combat is practically button smashing. Shooting is awsome - WITHOUT autoaim. Default is some autoaim whatnot which is a slap to PC audience. Not my friend nor me need that bullshit in games.
Ubisoft checklist is not true, there are no hundreds of things to collect in a small area, just a dozen or so in the first district I've watched.
Oh yeah, the game crashed twice in a few hours. The problem? It's openworld - with checkpoints. And there is no cab to call like in GTA5 to move you instantly somewhere.
So you need to drive back from somewhere and do something all over again. Someone should make checkopints illegal in openworlds.
Not saying the game is an utter rubbish but it does feel like prematurely released beta or whoever ported this on PC didn't know what are they doing.